Deathfire - Update #9, More Rewards

Today, we have an exciting update for you, not so much because we will talk more about the technology or features of “Deathfire: Ruins of Nethermore,” but because we are announcing a whole lot of changes to our reward structure, with the result that every single backer of our campaign will get more swag! How do you like that?

So let’s not waste any more time with preliminaries, let me outline for you, what is happening and what you can expect.

Rewards Galore!

First and foremost, all of our reward tiers will receive eBook versions of the entire “Jason Dark: Ghost Hunter” Collection, a series of pulp-fiction style novels, written by Guido Henkel. The collection features all eleven adventures, a $30 retail value, that we’re giving away to every single backer, even those coming in at the $5 level.

We are also creating a Monster Naming Pool. Throughout the game you will encounter various monsters and we will create a pool of names — that you will provide — and randomly pick unique names for many of these creatures. You can throw your own name, or a name you made up, into the pool if you’re backing this project at the $50 level or higher, adding to the variety this game will offer its players.

In addition, we have decided to create a Cloth Map for the game, displaying the various areas the game plays in. It will be beautifully crafted and best of all, it will be added to all existing physical reward tiers! Once again, we feel by adding this kind of value to all physical tiers, we can express our gratitude for your support! Naturally, the map itself will also be made available to all digital tiers in a digital image format.

One of the key levels in “Deathfire: Ruins of Nethermore” is a Graveyard area that surrounds the Apocryphic Temple at the top of Mount Nethermore. Instead of filling it with entirely made-up names, we have decided to hand the space over to you. We are giving you the chance to name the graves. At the $60 level and above, you will be able to name a tombstone. Once you commit to the $100 MOUSER EDITION and upwards, you will even be able to name an interment site in a catacomb, select the look of it from a number of designs, and place a personalized banner over it, which you can provide as a bitmap image. If you are a backer at the $300 level or higher, you will receive a fully personalized crypt instead. It will contain all of the above features and will also allow you to add a personal epitaph. With these rewards, which span a wide range of reward tiers, you can now immortalize yourself in the game!

As we pointed out before, the game features a recipe-based crafting system, which allows you to create brand new items, or enhance existing ones, such as weapons. Starting at the $100 MOUSER EDITION tier, backers now also have the ability to name a specific crafting recipe, adding their own name to the ancient lore of the game world this way.

For those of you more interested in all things combat, starting at the $120 CLASSIC BARD EDITION tier, we will also give you the opportunity to name a rare weapon. These highly individual weapons will be available to all players, but they will carry the name you provided. Imagine the fame your weapon could achieve among players!

This looks good but I've soured somewhat on kickstarters. The turn around time from pledge to release is just too long IMO.

While I knew this going in I didn't expect every game to get delayed for months( at least every one I've pledged to).

I've pledge to 7 and all that were scheduled for release have been delayed for several months. Unless my pledge alone enables them to get funded I no longer see the point In tying my money up now in games that won't release for years or not at all.

There are too many good games to spend my money on now and then I can pick these up later if they are funded and released. I'm actually leaning more toward early access now, especially if the are of the quality of Blackguards.

I'm not done with kickstarter but until I see some positive results I'm taking a break.
And yes, I do realize if everyone thinks like me nothing will get funded but I don't see that happening.

Been tempted but haven't pulled the trigger on this one. I've had good luck with kickstarters so far, but I've been pretty careful on which ones I choose. FTL was a great one because there was a short playable demo that allowed you to feel how the gameplay would work. Titles like this one require a bit more caution. I wonder if others are thinking similarly about this title or if people are just burning out on the Kickstarter model. We also only have so much money and a lot of people are now waiting months to years for the release of the title they funded.

Probably the worst risk for a failed project at backers' end is that the project is vaporized with their money. I'd take the risk but choose the minimum pledge tier for a copy of the game for the most of crowd-funding projects only with a few exceptions. Also, somehow, I don't believe a full-fledged RPG can be done within a year…some even say, at least, three years are needed.

I think these things sum up the extent of my expectation for any project. At least, saying anything negative cannot serve for any gamer since fewer backers mean fewer games to be realized. You can sit back and pay what you want or even totally ignore after the games are released (most likely when they are on sale).

I think these things sum up the extent of my expectation for any project. At least, saying anything negative cannot serve for any gamer since fewer backers mean fewer games to be realized. You can sit back and pay what you want or even totally ignore after the games are released (most likely when they are on sale).

The amount of games realized isn't important to every gamer out there. The amount of quality games realized would seem to be more interesting.

If something is unrealistic or seemingly not worth supporting, then I think saying it out loud is the correct thing to do. It will promote discussion and it will make the people developing the game take note and maybe even learn something, resulting in a better game or a new project.

Just ignoring obvious issues because you want everything to be released would seem to be a counterproductive position, but that's just me.

Evaluating the quality of a game is quite subjective and individuals should have their own brains to judge especially after the game is released. An exception would be when someone noticed a genuine scam for some reasons, though.

Originally Posted by Dusk
Evaluating the quality of a game is quite subjective and individuals should have their own brains to judge especially after the game is released. An exception would be when someone noticed a genuine scam for some reasons, though.

Are you saying we should never discuss anything negative openly and that people are ALL fully capable of spotting ALL potential issues for themselves?

Have you never been in a situation where another person has pointed out something you might have missed about anything?

Constructive criticisms are not counted (In fact, as a backer, I stated my opinion quite frankly for this project) but just saying negative thing about crowd-funding in general like some posts in this thread is not productive, IMHO.

Originally Posted by Dusk
Constructive criticisms are not counted (In fact, as a backer, I stated my opinion quite frankly for this project) but just saying negative thing about crowd-funding in general like some posts in this thread is not productive, IMHO.

Constructive criticism can be many things - and I think letting you decide what's appropriate or not is a very bad idea

Could you point out what in this thread has just been negative, according to you?

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
Constructive criticism can be many things - and I think letting you decide what's appropriate or not is a very bad idea

Could you point out what in this thread has just been negative, according to you?

So, you could enjoy your argument game for a while? Now, I'm very sure that this is not going to be productive at all.

In any case, I think a full-fledged CRPG is quite difficult to be successful in crowd-funding format since it tends to cost time. Even if you don't do anything, it's a fragile scheme and can die out quite quickly. I still keep backing projects I'm interested in but I wouldn't put too much expectation.

Originally Posted by Dusk
So, you could enjoy your argument game for a while? Now, I'm very sure that this is not going to be productive at all.

Argument game?

Is that when your clearly stated position on a public forum is challenged and you don't feel like defending it? Ok.

It was actually to establish any potential merit your position might have.

If I've helped to combat an irrationally supportive position, then I guess I can say I've enjoyed my "game". But let it be known that any such enjoyment hardly registers on my scale of having fun.

In any case, I think a full-fledged CRPG is quite difficult to be successful in crowd-funding format since it tends to cost time. Even if you don't do anything, it's a fragile scheme and can die out quite quickly. I still keep backing projects I'm interested in but I wouldn't put too much expectation.

Not sure what that has to do with anything and I don't think anyone here would disagree with the gist of that.

I'm not interested in any argument which just about serving my face-in fact, I think internet board is full of such infertile arguments to my eyes.

What I'm interested in is if games I may like to play can be realized or not. If somebody don't like crowd-funding, or have their own doubts, that's O.K. However, how can somebody be benefited by saying negative things about crowd-funding scheme in general, especially in this comment section about an update for the on-going campaign? Which was my initial point.

Originally Posted by Dusk
I'm not interested in any argument which just about serving my face-in fact, I think internet board is full of such infertile arguments to my eyes.

What I'm interested in is if games I may like to play can be realized or not. If somebody don't like crowd-funding, or have their own doubts, that's O.K. However, how can somebody be benefited by saying negative things about crowd-funding scheme in general, especially in this comment section about an update for the on-going campaign? Which was my initial point.

My original point was that any potential issues (with anything related to the topic - which is a Kickstarter project) should be discussed openly on a public forum dedicated to the discussion of games.

Trying to suppress negative opinions that you don't agree with is not a wise position and I don't think it will do as much good as it would do harm.

You've failed to point out how anyone here has been "just negative" - and instead of creating a compelling argument for your position - you've gone cyclical about general and pointless negativity that I can't see anywhere in this thread. I see people explaining their position honestly and openly without trying to persuade anyone in any way - except for you, that is.

I think that's more than enough for anyone curious about the merit of your point.

Do you think the comments of sakichop and irongamer (Don't take this personal, if you are referred by your names-this is not my initial intention) are related to this particular project? They are talking more of crowd-funding models in general. If it has to do with the game, Henkel and his team could do something but…

Also, as you stated, I didn't disagree with anyone here. I have my own pessimism about crowd-funding in general but, again, stating here in this thread or any other particular crowd-funding thread wouldn't lead you anywhere.

Originally Posted by Dusk
Do you think the comments of sakichop and irongamer (Don't take this personal, if you are referred by your names-this is not my initial intention) are related to this particular project? They are talking more of crowd-funding models in general. If it has to do with the game, Henkel and his team could do something but…

They're related to the concept of Kickstarter - and since this is a Kickstarter project - their reasoning for not supporting this particular project is 100% relevant - and I think it's interesting to hear about as well.

This site doesn't work for Henkel and it doesn't exist to exclusively satisfy developers.

It's a public forum for discussions related to RPG games.

Also, as you stated, I didn't disagree with anyone here. I have my own pessimism about crowd-funding in general but, again, stating here in this thread or any other particular crowd-funding thread wouldn't lead you anywhere.

I disagree with that entirely.

I enjoy hearing the thoughts of fellow RPG fans and potential backers. I don't think your reasons for not supporting this game HAS to be specifically about the game itself, and it's certainly no less interesting to me if it's not.

I think this is a perfect thread to discuss why you're not backing this particular game - whatever that reason might be, and regardless of whether that applies to other Kickstarters as well.

Originally Posted by Dusk
So, you could enjoy your argument game for a while? Now, I'm very sure that this is not going to be productive at all.

"Argument game" is a good term for the back and forth banter that Dart likes to draw folks into. JDR13 loves to jump into these too, but Dart is the instigator normally. Thanks for giving me a little term I can think of whenever I see these two people banter threads that Dart loves.

P.S. I never actually read any of them, but now I have a term for the stuff I constantly skip over